Each morning I read the online version of The Guardian (UK equivalent of the Washington Post and France's Le Monde)) and The Times, to get a balanced view of the world.
Today's Times ran a report by the United Nations on global greenhouse gas emissions and how they have reached a record high. Our global annual output of greenhouse gases is 53.5 bn tonnes and is set to be 59 bn tonnes by 2030. The "Paris Agreement" was for 40bn tonnes by 2030 to limit global warming to 2C and avoid catastrophic climate change.
At the end of the piece there was an unbroken run of 12 comments all denying the report's findings, claiming that climate change is a myth or attacking the integrity of the journalist who wrote it. This is classic climate change denial strategy as begun by ExxonMobil in the early 70s and modelled on the tobacco industry attempts to keep us smoking; despite lung cancer.
The primary tactic of environmental scepticism is........ "deny the evidence and deny the environmental problem"....... Then the deniers manufacture uncertainty by calling on us not to rush to judgement by claiming that more facts are needed.
Have a look at today's Times article then read the comments below it and judge for yourself, does it look like organised scepticism of Troll factories supported by individual contrarians who may be afraid, angry or just scientifically illiterate.
UNDP Global Outlook Report 2019
I can't give you a link to the Times article because there is a paywall around their website, you'll have to buy a copy I'm afraid.
For an appraisal of the history and denial strategy of contrarians have a look at this link....
How the fossil fuel industry blocks climate change action.
The comments in the Times are true to form
Lying
Generally you can find "outright denial" or conscious denial in the face of the facts or events, this is lying (See; D. Trump).
Bullshit
Instead of outright denial, the denier can choose to interpret the facts of climate change in order to distract. For example the accumulation of Co2 in the atmosphere is due to rising temperatures. not vice versa.
Deceit
Deniers can accept the facts of climate change then proceed to present them as something else altogether by minimising or dismissing the need to act when the facts say that we should. Most of us are guilty.
For example, I take the train on European journeys instead of flying and kid myself that I am doing my bit. The emergence of Extinction Rebellion has made more of us think about our response to climate change, self-deceit is becoming increasingly untenable in the face of a moral imperative.
 |
| Photo: Patrick Hendry, Unsplash |
At the end of the piece there was an unbroken run of 12 comments all denying the report's findings, claiming that climate change is a myth or attacking the integrity of the journalist who wrote it. This is classic climate change denial strategy as begun by ExxonMobil in the early 70s and modelled on the tobacco industry attempts to keep us smoking; despite lung cancer.
The primary tactic of environmental scepticism is........ "deny the evidence and deny the environmental problem"....... Then the deniers manufacture uncertainty by calling on us not to rush to judgement by claiming that more facts are needed.
Have a look at today's Times article then read the comments below it and judge for yourself, does it look like organised scepticism of Troll factories supported by individual contrarians who may be afraid, angry or just scientifically illiterate.
UNDP Global Outlook Report 2019
I can't give you a link to the Times article because there is a paywall around their website, you'll have to buy a copy I'm afraid.
For an appraisal of the history and denial strategy of contrarians have a look at this link....
How the fossil fuel industry blocks climate change action.
The comments in the Times are true to form
- It's not true, it's a myth
- The evidence is widely disputed
- This is a conspiracy
- The journalist lacks integrity he / she is just recycling PR material
It has to be mostly paid for Trolls writing this , who else would spend their day churning out the same old stuff? Their output falls into three categories:
 |
| It's not just "big oil" coal mining is still expanding |
Generally you can find "outright denial" or conscious denial in the face of the facts or events, this is lying (See; D. Trump).
Bullshit
Instead of outright denial, the denier can choose to interpret the facts of climate change in order to distract. For example the accumulation of Co2 in the atmosphere is due to rising temperatures. not vice versa.
Deceit
Deniers can accept the facts of climate change then proceed to present them as something else altogether by minimising or dismissing the need to act when the facts say that we should. Most of us are guilty.
For example, I take the train on European journeys instead of flying and kid myself that I am doing my bit. The emergence of Extinction Rebellion has made more of us think about our response to climate change, self-deceit is becoming increasingly untenable in the face of a moral imperative.
No comments:
Post a Comment